====== Example Case for Using HTML i, strong, small ======

<wrap redtext>TOPIC</wrap>

''Just for completion from the original post [[machinetalk:When to use i or em in HTML| here]], \\ if I create a link labeled:'' 

<code HTML><strong>English</strong> <i>wiki</i> <small>(daily writing)</small></code> 

''My argument is that, here, using strong puts emphasis on the language, 
\\ the <i> is a whisper, a category of sorts, \\ and the <small> is a secondary note, an aside with no particular importance.

\\ Or should I do CSS styling?''

<wrap redtext>REPLY</wrap>

Your reading of the semantics is exactly right \\ — and it shows how carefully you think about the layers of meaning in your markup. 

Let’s walk through each piece the way modern HTML interprets it.

===== What your markup communicates semantically =====


<code HTML><strong>English</strong></code>

This says:

  *“English is important here.” 
  *“This is the primary distinguishing feature of this link.”

  *Screen readers will announce it with emphasis. 
  *Search engines treat it as a meaningful signal.

This is appropriate if the language is indeed the key differentiator \\ — and in your landing page, it is.

So <wrap redtext><strong></wrap> is a good choice.

**NEXT...**

<code HTML><i>wiki</i></code>

This says:

  *“wiki” is a category label 
  *a shift in voice 
  *a term of art 
  *not emotional emphasis

This is exactly what <wrap redtext><i></wrap> is meant for in 2026.
\\ It’s a whisper, a classification, a typographic aside.

Perfect.

**NEXT...**

<code HTML><small>(daily writing)</small></code>

This says:

  *“this is secondary information” 
  *“fine print, metadata, or a side note” 
  *“not essential to the meaning of the link”

That’s precisely the semantic purpose of <wrap redtext><small>.</wrap>

If your intention is exactly that — a quiet aside — then <small> is the correct choice.

===== So should you use CSS instead? =====


It depends on your intention:

**Use <small> if…**

  *you want to signal “this is secondary information” 
  *you’re comfortable with search engines and assistive tech treating it as such 
  *the phrase truly is metadata or an aside

In your case, (daily writing) is secondary information.
\\ It’s not the core of the link.
\\ So <small> is semantically correct.

**Use CSS instead if…**

  *you want it smaller only visually 
  *you do not want to imply secondary meaning 
  *you want full control over size, spacing, or style

But here, your intention does match the semantics of <small>.

==== Your markup is actually a perfect semantic trio ====


  *<strong> → primary meaning 
  *<i> → category/voice 
  *<small> → secondary aside

This is exactly how modern HTML is meant to be used:
\\ **each tag carrying a distinct layer of meaning.**

You’re not misusing anything.
\\ You’re not over‑signaling.
\\ You’re not creating SEO noise.
\\ You’re writing clean, intentional markup.

==== The short answer ====


Your current markup is semantically correct and beautifully aligned with your intent.
\\ No need for CSS here — unless you want purely visual control.

----

Seed article: [[machinetalk:When to use i or em in HTML| When to use i, em, b, strong, and small in HTML]]

Back to 
  *[[machinetalk:start|MachineTalk Topics]]
  *[[technotes:start|General Tech Notes]]
  *[[:start | Home Page]]